http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation

Perhaps the writers of the blog can address this.

I have as much admiration for Summers, Buffett, and Volker as anyone alive, but even they would be looked at by most as “unworthy” of the task. We’re left with the previous helmsmen because, quite simply, there’s nobody else that would be accepted. This is just the nature of things, and politics is the ultimate manifestation of nature.

There are no easy solutions to our myriad of regulatory issues – today’s markets are too fluid, too complex to pin down with broad policies. We have to vet it all out in the public forum, accept the give and take, occasionally bite our tongues, and accept that for all its faults we’re basically watching a miniature form of a market-based solution; different forces pushing and pulling until only one survives. 100 years from now, after we’ve been through 3 or 4 new crises, we’ll realize that whatever reform is crafted didn’t quite prepare us for the next one, and on, and on.

In the meantime and after, it will be up to the individual investor to navigate, make their own decisions, and find the best way to cast the only vote that is always tabulated – the $ vote.

Ryan Barnes

By “allies” do you mean ‘near’ proxies? I don’t know how much of a corner he backed himself into, given that he has the authority to choose those in key positions and merely elected to go with ‘what works’ perhaps by keeping this little coterie of banking surrogates. For the average tax payer, this is unworkable, but it’s working for specific interest and with great result. In the vernacular of boxing, this is the ‘corner’ he chose. If you expand the focus to include Wall Street proper and consider that he surrounded himself with ‘ex’ (not nearly enough) bankers, a pattern begins to develop.

“I don’t want to get into the merits of these issues here. But when you are reforming the regulatory structure of an industry where the existing regulators got it horribly, embarrassingly, catastrophically, world-historically wrong, the last thing you want to do is strike a compromise between the positions of the existing regulators.”

Sure, but again, in keeping with a clearly evident pattern, the country was sold or at least a sale was attempted along the lines of ‘the best people to get us out of this mess are the ones who got us in it’ in blatant deference to those running the banks. Doesn’t matter how wrong, impaired, flawed or avaricious they’ve demonstrated them to be.

I think there are many things to like and appreciate about President Obama. Often however, the realities of this administration falls far from the romantic notions of the concept or idea of this administration. It’s hard to believe that he’s been in office a smidgen shy of five months. With all the talk of the lobbyist grip on Washington, you’d think this administration would be more astute and discerning, that key personnel that worked for banks are the ones that hired the lobbyist in the first place as lobbyist only represent the interest of their clients. That said go ahead and get rid of the lobbyist (I don’t think that’s really happened either, but assuming you could) but then if you surround yourself with the people who hired them, nothing has been achieved other than allowing those who used to pay for lobbyist to shape policy directly.

Yes, Washington and Wall Street are very insular in nature and the characterization of a bubble quite apt. Maybe I am beginning to be jaded, but as I watch this banking reform unfold, I have no illusions about this administration tackling healthcare. The thought of being legally required to have health insurance after the health industry is reformed sends shivers up my spine. If by fixing healthcare the net result is the type of fix Wall Street seems to be getting, which is more of ‘the fix is in variety’, I will not cherish being herded to the insurance companies by law.

Actually, that was his experience as editor in chief of the Harvard Law Review. Trouble is, in that case his ideological opponents were also motivated to produce a quality publication. His political opponents are motivated to bring him down.

I think you have hit the nail on the head, here. My impression is that Obama does recognize the importance of financial regulation, but realizes that he does not have the answers. So he relies heavily upon his advisors, who have worked within the existing framework and have helped to create it. They are invested in it and are probably suggesting tweaks instead of major reforms. In addition, as a politician he recognizes that Congress has the final say. (He is not going to veto a Democratic Congress in this area.) He may also believe that the previous administration tried to concentrate too much power for the executive branch, and aim to restore some balance between the Presidency and the Congress.

General Jackson’s face is on the $20 bill for doing just that. Things sometimes rhyme.

The predatorclass owns the government, the political leadership (left and right), and the economic oligarchs and superpowers. If things go pearshaped, or Shakespearean, then get with god and make thee straight before the lord, for the day of reckoning is dawning. If the gods or goddess’s care about humanity, then some numinous force will descend to earthly realms and usher, or guide humanity out of the darkness. If not, – then buckle your seat belts, and put your trays in the fixed and upright position – we’re about to enter some turbulence!”

Robbing from the poor and middle class, to feed the superrich, the predatorclass, is repugnant, and conduct unbecoming. We well and truly are our sisters and brothers keepers, – or – what are we really? Mercinaries? Profiteers? Zealots? Fundamentalists? Imperlialists? Fascists? What are we?

I love Christine Romer, but she just is not independent enough, although I think that she should be a part of the New Warren Commission for reform, along with Goolsby. It should not include a single current regulator or policy wonk, especially not Tim, Larry, or Paul. I would have it include Simon, Nouriel, Niall, and Tom Hoenig. That team could provide real revolutionary ideas for going forward.

Help us out here, Simon and James, try to build a strong concensus by getting on the air waves and providing us will the ammunition we need for a real public outcry on this issue. Unfortunately, this blog, though really wonderful, seems to attract the intellectually astute, and not John Q. Public. That is unfortunate, but just a fact of life.